Cargando…

Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure

Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Hong, Cao, Liang Ren, Liu, Qiang, Wei, Jia, Wang, Ying Chun, Hu, Lu, Yang, Zheng Hua, Liu, Heng Ping, Li, Shi Bing, Yan, Yun Xiang, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442
_version_ 1782394668530532352
author De Hong, Cao
Liang Ren, Liu
Qiang, Wei
Jia, Wang
Ying Chun, Hu
Lu, Yang
Zheng Hua, Liu
Heng Ping, Li
Shi Bing, Yan
Yun Xiang, Li
author_facet De Hong, Cao
Liang Ren, Liu
Qiang, Wei
Jia, Wang
Ying Chun, Hu
Lu, Yang
Zheng Hua, Liu
Heng Ping, Li
Shi Bing, Yan
Yun Xiang, Li
author_sort De Hong, Cao
collection PubMed
description Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment of localized PCa. A comprehensive literature search retrieved 14 publications, with a total of 1715 patients. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that an ELRP approach was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative catheterization time (MD: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.52 to 3.54; P = 0.008), less blood transfusion rate (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.06; P = 0.04), shorter intestinal function recovery time (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.09; P < 0.0001) and shorter hospitalization days (MD: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.39; P = 0.002). In addition, our results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in operation time (MD: 19.39; 95% CI: −6.67 to 45.44; P = 0.014), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 4.89; 95% CI: −105.00 to 114.79; P = 0.93) and total complication rate (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.74; P = 0.27). In summary, our meta-analysis showed that ELRP is likely to be a safe and feasible alternative for localized PCa patients compared with TLRP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4602188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46021882015-10-23 Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure De Hong, Cao Liang Ren, Liu Qiang, Wei Jia, Wang Ying Chun, Hu Lu, Yang Zheng Hua, Liu Heng Ping, Li Shi Bing, Yan Yun Xiang, Li Sci Rep Article Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment of localized PCa. A comprehensive literature search retrieved 14 publications, with a total of 1715 patients. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that an ELRP approach was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative catheterization time (MD: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.52 to 3.54; P = 0.008), less blood transfusion rate (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.06; P = 0.04), shorter intestinal function recovery time (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.09; P < 0.0001) and shorter hospitalization days (MD: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.39; P = 0.002). In addition, our results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in operation time (MD: 19.39; 95% CI: −6.67 to 45.44; P = 0.014), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 4.89; 95% CI: −105.00 to 114.79; P = 0.93) and total complication rate (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.74; P = 0.27). In summary, our meta-analysis showed that ELRP is likely to be a safe and feasible alternative for localized PCa patients compared with TLRP. Nature Publishing Group 2015-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4602188/ /pubmed/26458990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442 Text en Copyright © 2015, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
De Hong, Cao
Liang Ren, Liu
Qiang, Wei
Jia, Wang
Ying Chun, Hu
Lu, Yang
Zheng Hua, Liu
Heng Ping, Li
Shi Bing, Yan
Yun Xiang, Li
Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title_full Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title_fullStr Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title_short Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
title_sort comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458990
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442
work_keys_str_mv AT dehongcao comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT liangrenliu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT qiangwei comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT jiawang comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT yingchunhu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT luyang comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT zhenghualiu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT hengpingli comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT shibingyan comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure
AT yunxiangli comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure